Free flu shots vs herd immunity in flu vaccination advertising: the interaction of attribute type and message sidedness on flu vaccination judgment

IF 1.2 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Kenneth E. Kim
{"title":"Free flu shots vs herd immunity in flu vaccination advertising: the interaction of attribute type and message sidedness on flu vaccination judgment","authors":"Kenneth E. Kim","doi":"10.1108/IJPHM-06-2020-0053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to examine how the relative importance of a search versus a credence attribute, strategically addressed in a flu vaccination advertisement, varies as a function of message sidedness. A search attribute was designed to highlight the affordability of flu shots, and a credence attribute addressed the potential health benefits of flu vaccination.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nTwo experiments were designed to explore how the relative persuasiveness of search versus credence attributes varies as a function of message sidedness in the context of flu vaccination advertising. In Experiment 1, the search–credence attribute type was manipulated by addressing either the affordability (e.g. “Get free flu shots”) or indirect health benefits of flu vaccines (e.g. “Improve herd immunity/community health”). In Experiment 2, an individual-level credence attribute (e.g. “Strengthen your immune system”) was created and compared to the other two attribute conditions used in Experiment 1: a search versus a societal credence versus an individual credence attribute.\n\n\nFindings\nExperiment 1 (N = 114) revealed the relative advantage of a search attribute (free flu shots) in the two-sided persuasion. Experiment 2 (N = 193) indicated that the persuasive impact of a societal credence attribute (herd immunity/community health) was greater in the two-sided message condition (vs one-sided message condition).\n\n\nOriginality/value\nRelatively little research has examined how consumers respond to strategic flu prevention and vaccination messages promoting either credence or search attributes. Motivated by the need to investigate the relative effectiveness of stressing “herd immunity” versus “free flu shots” in flu vaccination advertising, this study examines how the effects of these distinct attributes on flu vaccination judgments differ between two-sided (e.g. “No vaccine is 100% effective”) and one-sided persuasion.\n","PeriodicalId":51798,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing","volume":"15 1","pages":"298-311"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPHM-06-2020-0053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine how the relative importance of a search versus a credence attribute, strategically addressed in a flu vaccination advertisement, varies as a function of message sidedness. A search attribute was designed to highlight the affordability of flu shots, and a credence attribute addressed the potential health benefits of flu vaccination. Design/methodology/approach Two experiments were designed to explore how the relative persuasiveness of search versus credence attributes varies as a function of message sidedness in the context of flu vaccination advertising. In Experiment 1, the search–credence attribute type was manipulated by addressing either the affordability (e.g. “Get free flu shots”) or indirect health benefits of flu vaccines (e.g. “Improve herd immunity/community health”). In Experiment 2, an individual-level credence attribute (e.g. “Strengthen your immune system”) was created and compared to the other two attribute conditions used in Experiment 1: a search versus a societal credence versus an individual credence attribute. Findings Experiment 1 (N = 114) revealed the relative advantage of a search attribute (free flu shots) in the two-sided persuasion. Experiment 2 (N = 193) indicated that the persuasive impact of a societal credence attribute (herd immunity/community health) was greater in the two-sided message condition (vs one-sided message condition). Originality/value Relatively little research has examined how consumers respond to strategic flu prevention and vaccination messages promoting either credence or search attributes. Motivated by the need to investigate the relative effectiveness of stressing “herd immunity” versus “free flu shots” in flu vaccination advertising, this study examines how the effects of these distinct attributes on flu vaccination judgments differ between two-sided (e.g. “No vaccine is 100% effective”) and one-sided persuasion.
流感疫苗接种广告中的免费流感疫苗与群体免疫:属性类型和信息侧性对流感疫苗接种判断的影响
目的本研究旨在检验流感疫苗接种广告中策略性提及的搜索与信任属性的相对重要性如何随着信息侧性的变化而变化。一个搜索属性旨在强调流感疫苗的可负担性,而一个信任属性则涉及流感疫苗接种的潜在健康益处。设计/方法/方法两个实验旨在探索在流感疫苗接种广告的背景下,搜索与信任属性的相对说服力如何随着信息侧性的变化而变化。在实验1中,通过解决流感疫苗的可负担性(例如“免费接种流感疫苗”)或间接健康益处(例如“提高群体免疫/社区健康”)来操纵搜索-信任属性类型。在实验2中,创建了个人级别的信任属性(例如“增强免疫系统”),并将其与实验1中使用的其他两个属性条件进行了比较:搜索与社会信任与个人信任属性。发现实验1(N = 114)揭示了搜索属性(免费流感疫苗)在双侧说服中的相对优势。实验2(N = 193)表明,社会信任属性(群体免疫/社区健康)的说服力在双侧信息条件下(与单侧信息条件相比)更大。原创性/价值相对较少的研究考察了消费者对促进信任或搜索属性的战略性流感预防和疫苗接种信息的反应。出于调查在流感疫苗接种广告中强调“群体免疫”与“免费流感疫苗”的相对有效性的需要,本研究考察了这些不同属性对流感疫苗接种判断的影响在双侧(例如“没有疫苗是100%有效的”)和单侧说服之间的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信